Pubdate: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 Source: Post and Courier, The (Charleston, SC) http://archives.postandcourier.com/archive/arch07/0207/arc02033946997.shtml Copyright: 2007 Evening Post Publishing Co. Contact: http://www.charleston.net/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/567 Note: Rarely prints LTEs received from outside its circulation area Author: Skip Johnson Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/pot.htm (Cannabis) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/testing.htm (Drug Test) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/youth.htm (Youth) TESTS DON'T WORK The White House sent a team of speakers to Charleston recently to persuade parents, educators and public officials that randomly testing public school students for drugs is a powerful tool to keep kids off drugs, (Post and Courier, Page 1-A, Sept. 25). Horsefeathers! The truth is that testing students for drugs does not reduce drug use. Instead, it creates more problems than it solves, and it benefits nobody except the companies that do the testing. That's why the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Public Health Association, the National Education Association, the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, among others, all vehemently oppose it. The presentation itself, sponsored by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (the so-called "Drug Czar's Office") was slick. The speakers were well-trained, knowledgeable, articulate and enthusiastic, and they used eye-popping visuals to make their points. But for the most part, they only allowed written questions with no follow-up questions allowed, and they trivialized the serious problems that drug-testing experience has revealed -- such as the fact that it does not work. The only national study of the idea, performed by University of Michigan, showed that very clearly. And when the ONDCP complained that the survey was flawed, the researchers repeated the survey to take those complaints into account and came up with the identical results. There are many other drawbacks to randomly drug testing students. It assumes kids are guilty and forces them to prove their innocence. It sends them the message that we don't trust them, which drives a wedge between adults and teens. It encourages teens to switch from testable drugs, such as marijuana, to drugs that do not register on the tests but are more dangerous, such as glue-sniffing or worse. It raises all sorts of legal and moral questions. What happens, for instance, when a child's reputation is sullied by a false negative? It discourages teenagers from participating in extracurricular activities, which many studies have proven are among the few things that are effective in reducing drug use among youngsters. There are many other problems with drug testing, which are far too numerous to list here. I can only hope parents, educators and public officials will not take the drug czar's word as truth but, instead, will take a long, hard look at the facts -- especially who really benefits from testing -- before they leap into something that could damage our children for years to come. Skip Johnson Vice President South Carolinians for Drug Law Reform 72 Meeting St.